MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3195342422 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2020-0599

Empirical correlation of the modified wheel tracker (MWT) and the dynamic creep test for evaluating the permanent deformation of hot mix asphalt (HMA)

2021· article· en· W3195342422 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abhirup B. Roy-Chowdhury, Mofreh Saleh, Miguel Moyers-Gonzalez

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAsphalt Pavement Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreepDeformation (meteorology)Materials scienceRutShear (geology)AsphaltDirect shear testTracking (education)Structural engineeringRepeatabilityTest dataGeotechnical engineeringComposite materialGeologyComputer scienceEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The wheel tracking test (WTT) has been extensively used for laboratory characterization of permanent deformation of hot mix asphalt (HMA). However, the fully-confined setup of the device is unable to capture the tertiary zone where shear deformation takes place. This makes the permanent deformation resistance characteristics of HMA difficult to analyze. Hence, a modified wheel tracker (MWT), with unconfined lateral sides along the wheel tracking direction was utilized in this study, which can capture the tertiary flow (referred to as the flow number (FN)). The dynamic creep test, which yields FN, is a common laboratory test which has the ability to characterize permanent deformation considering the shear behavior. The study investigated the relationship of the MWT and the dynamic creep test utilizing the permanent deformation and permanent microstrain data from the respective tests. A novel parameter, FN-Index was explored. The permanent deformation parameters derived from the MWT were well correlated with the dynamic creep test. The MWT showed promising repeatability for the FNs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicAsphalt Pavement Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207